Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 125 N.J. Super. 414 - Devaney v. Sarno

125 N.J. Super. 414 - Devaney v. Sarno’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
8
states following
December 1998
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 1998 · most notably Cepeda v. Cumberland Engineering Company, Inc. (1978), 462 So. 2d 166 - Bell v. Jet Wheel Blast, Div. of Ervin Industries (1985)

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 19 state decisions

170197319801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc. · Judson v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield · Cintrone v. Hertz Truck Leasing & Rental Service · Bexiga v. Havir Manufacturing Corp. · Ruvolo v. American Casualty Co.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““[The car manufacturer] did not install the seat belt to avoid a car accident — this was done to avoid or lessen serious injuries to the driver or passenger which might result from an accident. Thus there had to be an accident before the effect of the defective product came into play.” 125 N.J.Super. at 419 , 311 A.2d at 210 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““* * * Qn o^er hand the form of contributory negligence which consists in voluntarily and unreasonably proceeding to encounter a known danger, and commonly passes under the name of assumption of risk, is a defense under this Section as in other cases of strict liability. If the user or consumer discovers the defect and is aware of the danger, and nevertheless proceeds unreasonably to make use of the product and is injured by it, he is barred from recovery.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Products Liability: Contributory Negligence or Assumption of Risk as Defense under Doctrine of Strict Liability in Tort,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.